Comments on Whither conservatism?TypePad2012-11-20T23:11:02ZEric Zornhttp://blogs.chicagotribune.com/news_columnists_ezorn/tag:typepad.com,2003:http://blogs.chicagotribune.com/news_columnists_ezorn/2012/11/whither-conservatism/comments/atom.xml/MCN commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017d3e2e5476970c2012-11-26T17:22:37Z2012-11-26T17:22:37ZMCNEZ: Sorry I haven't conformed to your demands. I took a few days off and I also actually work for...<p>EZ: Sorry I haven&#39;t conformed to your demands. I took a few days off and I also actually work for a living and that means I don&#39;t get a lot of weekends off.</p>Barry3 commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017ee588bd70970d2012-11-23T13:48:53Z2012-11-23T13:48:53ZBarry3Thanks for teh rules, I'll do my best to follow them. Appreciate the spelling and grammer error part a lot.<p>Thanks for teh rules, I&#39;ll do my best to follow them. Appreciate the spelling and grammer error part a lot.</p>Barry3 commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017c33e1d5d7970b2012-11-23T02:45:26Z2012-11-23T02:45:26ZBarry3Wendy - Do you get happy when conservative voices are silenced?<p>Wendy - Do you get happy when conservative voices are silenced?</p>Barry3 commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017ee5856850970d2012-11-23T02:44:44Z2012-11-23T02:44:44ZBarry3Zorn - where are your rules posted? This is all I see. "Change of Subject" by Chicago Tribune op-ed columnist...<p>Zorn - where are your rules posted? This is all I see.</p>
<p>&quot;Change of Subject&quot; by Chicago Tribune op-ed columnist Eric Zorn contains observations, reports, tips, referrals and tirades, though not necessarily in that order. Links will tend to expire, so seize the day. For an archive of Zorn&#39;s latest Tribune columns click here. An explanation of the title of this blog is here. If you have other questions, suggestions or comments, send e-mail to ericzorn at gmail.com. <br />
More about Eric Zorn </p>
<p>Contributing editor Megan Crepeau is a 2010 graduate of Northwestern University and is the coordinator of the Tribune&#39;s editorial board. She can be reached at mcrepeau at tribune.com.</p>
<p>ZORN REPLY -- There used to be a more obvious link to them on the front of the blog, sorry. They&#39;re here and linked in the &quot;Categories&quot; under Rules for commenting :<br />
<a href="http://blogs.chicagotribune.com/news_columnists_ezorn/2009/01/rules-for-commenting.html" rel="nofollow">http://blogs.chicagotribune.com/news_columnists_ezorn/2009/01/rules-for-commenting.html</a></p>Barry3 commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017d3e108685970c2012-11-23T02:42:16Z2012-11-23T02:42:16ZBarry3Zorn, Quote me where I am being a jerk so I know where your boundaries are.<p>Zorn,</p>
<p>Quote me where I am being a jerk so I know where your boundaries are.</p>Wendy commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017ee5836f33970d2012-11-22T20:29:07Z2012-11-22T20:29:07ZWendyEnjoy your time here while you can, Barry. I have a feeling you won't be with us much longer.<p>Enjoy your time here while you can, Barry. I have a feeling you won&#39;t be with us much longer.</p>Barry3 commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017ee5836280970d2012-11-22T20:19:49Z2012-11-22T20:19:49ZBarry3MO, Barry is the new poster trying to shine a light on liberal stupidity. By my short-time here, I see...<p>MO,</p>
<p>Barry is the new poster trying to shine a light on liberal stupidity. By my short-time here, I see I found a nice source; however, its not quite the Trib Swamp nor some of the morons that used to post on Trib articles pre-facebook.</p>
<p>ZORN REPLY -- You might want to acquaint yourself with the rules, Barry. I don&#39;t hesitate to give flaming jerks the bum&#39;s rush. They often write me afterward bleating about censorship, but I can take it. I also offer to post the URL of their personal blogs so that anyone who misses their insights can go and read them anytime. They never do, though, because they know they&#39;d get no visitors. So you can either work on not being a jerk, or get ready for your &quot;good day!&quot;</p>JerryB commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017c33da7e2e970b2012-11-22T03:45:39Z2012-11-22T03:45:39ZJerryBOccam: Not for a beer -- any beer. They have a great pub though. Check the website. I would only...<p>Occam:</p>
<p>Not for a beer -- any beer. They have a great pub though. Check the website.</p>
<p>I would only do it if you are otherwise passing through.</p>Occam's Razor commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017ee57dfbc4970d2012-11-22T03:39:05Z2012-11-22T03:39:05ZOccam's Razor@Jerry B: "I was at Three Floyds last Saturday...Took the tour also." Worth the drive? Bear in mind I can...<p>@Jerry B: &quot;I was at Three Floyds last Saturday...Took the tour also.&quot; Worth the drive? Bear in mind I can smell WI from my house.</p>MOPerina commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017d3e09186d970c2012-11-22T03:38:55Z2012-11-22T03:38:55ZMOPerinaI am not offended by that picture of Goldie. I had forgotten how she was usually dressed while on Laugh...<p>I am not offended by that picture of Goldie. I had forgotten how she was usually dressed while on Laugh In. I have only seen that in reruns long after it was cancelled. </p>
<p>Barry3 is the new contraversial poster, not a troll, I don&#39;t think. I have also noticed that Tom Blackford is more tempered. </p>
<p>I think the future of conservatives and Republicans can&#39;t be answered solely by some list of subcategories. I think the men are ignoring that most women are completely put off by extreme, no exceptions abortion stance. </p>JerryB commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017d3e08e144970c2012-11-22T03:00:43Z2012-11-22T03:00:43ZJerryBOccam: You piece of slime -- just kidding -- I was at Three Floyds last Saturday. Alpha Klaus -- Robert...<p>Occam:</p>
<p>You piece of slime -- just kidding -- I was at Three Floyds last Saturday.</p>
<p>Alpha Klaus -- Robert de Bruce -- Toppless Witch. Took the tour also.</p>Barry3 commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017ee57dc10a970d2012-11-22T02:58:27Z2012-11-22T02:58:27ZBarry3Xuuths, TARP was passed in October, 2008 - which is part of Fiscal Year 2009. As Lincoln said "It is...<p>Xuuths,</p>
<p>TARP was passed in October, 2008 - which is part of Fiscal Year 2009.</p>
<p>As Lincoln said &quot;It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool, then to open one&#39;s mouth and remove all doubt.&quot; Advice you should try and follow.</p>Occam's Razor commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017ee57d5ce0970d2012-11-22T01:45:15Z2012-11-22T01:45:15ZOccam's Razor"...in case we have a CoS party." There'd better be alcohol involved.<p>&quot;...in case we have a CoS party.&quot;</p>
<p>There&#39;d better be alcohol involved.</p>JerryB commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017ee57d2ff1970d2012-11-22T01:16:08Z2012-11-22T01:16:08ZJerryBMCN & Zorn & Mr.JM: That is why I am mild mannered. Dr. X has to get into his pyscho...<p>MCN &amp; Zorn &amp; Mr.JM:</p>
<p>That is why I am mild mannered. Dr. X has to get into his pyscho submarine in order to find subtext in my text.</p>
<p>BTW ERIC: I think MOPerina is PO&#39;d at us for that unflattering picture of Goldie Hawn you posted. You better get another.</p>
<p>If MOPernia is a babe -- which I suspect she is -- I do not want her PO&#39;d at me in case we have a CoS party.</p>MrJM commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017d3e0840fa970c2012-11-22T01:02:40Z2012-11-22T01:02:40ZMrJMXuuths, To paraphrase a Brazilian saying, "Arguing with a troll is the same as playing chess with a pigeon: when...<p>Xuuths,</p>
<p>To paraphrase a Brazilian saying, &quot;Arguing with a troll is the same as playing chess with a pigeon: when the pigeon defecates on the table, drop the pieces and simply fly, claiming victory.&quot;</p>
<p>-- MrJM</p>MCN commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017c33d913c7970b2012-11-21T23:17:08Z2012-11-21T23:17:08ZMCN"the narrow, bitter, smug, asphyxiatingly parochial, xenophobic social conservatism that so often accompanies it." I can pick up a thesaurus...<p>&quot;the narrow, bitter, smug, asphyxiatingly parochial, xenophobic social conservatism that so often accompanies it.&quot;</p>
<p>I can pick up a thesaurus of insults, too, to describe liberalism, except my list would be three or four times as long.</p>
<p>ZORN REPLY -- Go ahead and try. You&#39;re always bragging that you could do this or that better--- what was that recent boast you made about being able to write something just as smart and twice as funny, then when people asked you to go ahead and do it you disappeared? Come on, big guy, let&#39;s see it. Go ahead and use your thesaurus -- I don&#39;t need one, but perhaps you do -- and hit us with your best shot.</p>Xuuths commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017c33d90cd1970b2012-11-21T23:11:16Z2012-11-21T23:11:16ZXuuthsBarry3, you are an Internet troll. Please. The TARP Stimulus was passed in 2008. The rest of your information is...<p>Barry3, you are an Internet troll.</p>
<p>Please. The TARP Stimulus was passed in 2008. The rest of your information is equally flawed.</p>
<p>Happy Thanksgiving y&#39;all.</p>Barry3 commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017c33d8a852970b2012-11-21T21:49:37Z2012-11-21T21:49:37ZBarry3Xuuths, "Barry3, your ignorance about federal spending is legion. The federal fiscal year is from October 1st of one year...<p>Xuuths,</p>
<p>&quot;Barry3, your ignorance about federal spending is legion. The federal fiscal year is from October 1st of one year through September 30th of the next -- meaning that the entire first nine months of calendar year 2009&#39;s budget were legislated under Bush.&quot;</p>
<p>Were appropriation bills of 2009 passed for 2009 before Jan 20, 2009? No.</p>
<p>Was the Stimulus passed before January 20, 2009? No.</p>
<p>Therefore, most of the spending for 2009 was under Obama. </p>
<p>One exception was the the bank bailouts that occurred in October 2008 under Bush. This was done and then ultimately repaid during the Obama years.<br />
</p>JerryB commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017ee57c15cd970d2012-11-21T21:35:28Z2012-11-21T21:35:28ZJerryB--LizH: Thanks for the response. I do not want to turn this into a voucher thread. MCN and I come...<p>--LizH:</p>
<p>Thanks for the response. I do not want to turn this into a voucher thread. MCN and I come from very modest backgrounds. But we were educated in Catholic grammar and high schools. It would be nice if our folks had a voucher.</p>
<p>Let the traditional public, charter, and voucher sustained private schools exist side-by-side. This works at the college level.</p>
<p>Teacher unions simply do not want to end their almost complete monopoly. Since this is done at the expense of children – it is vile.</p>
<p>Many public school teachers fear that the motivated kids will be siphoned away from their schools. My response is great. Why should the motivated poor children be held hostage for the benefit of the unmotivated poor?</p>
<p>Finally – although we disagree you have always treated me and others civilly. Thanks for that.</p>
<p>p.s. “Collage” – I am still laughing.<br />
</p>Wendy commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017c33d890bb970b2012-11-21T21:31:17Z2012-11-21T21:31:17ZWendy"...there is no such thing as compassionate conservatism because real conservatives understand that the government is incapable of compassion. We...<p>&quot;...there is no such thing as compassionate conservatism because real conservatives understand that the government is incapable of compassion. We exercise compassion only by reducing government.&quot;</p>
<p>The government envisioned by conservatives, yes. But, I&#39;ll agree that compassionate conservatism does not, cannot exist. There&#39;s isn&#39;t any room for compassion within their mindset. (Except for the presidential pardon given the turkey on Thanksgiving Eve!)</p>
<p>Happy Thanksgiving, everybody!</p>LizH commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017c33d851d5970b2012-11-21T20:44:14Z2012-11-21T20:44:14ZLizHI too have comments about what JerryB said: 1) Most pro-life legislation. This is compassion for the unborn. At the...<p>I too have comments about what JerryB said:</p>
<p>1) Most pro-life legislation. This is compassion for the unborn.</p>
<p>At the risk of the mother&#39;s health or life, if need be, and often based on bad &quot;science&quot;.</p>
<p>2) School voucher legislation – compassion for those disadvantaged motivated students stuck in classrooms full of unmotivated students.</p>
<p>My opinion (and I tend to agree to Dienne &amp; Wendy on education matters) is that many people do not believe that a public education is a good thing, and this is one of the ways that you can destroy it without most people realizing it. Then only those who can afford it can be educated properly (note the small size of many private schools; where do we fit all the others?) and we have a permanent underclass to do all the menial tasks. I don&#39;t blame many for believing that this is the answer; they have been sold a bill of goods, such as: you can somehow afford a private school education with a voucher, that they have room for - and will let in or let stay - any child whose parent wants them to go there, and that it&#39;s the teacher&#39;s fault that they aren&#39;t learning. Look at LA for the wonderful way vouchers are working. Bible based math &amp; science, indeed!</p>JerryB commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017ee57bceff970d2012-11-21T20:41:07Z2012-11-21T20:41:07ZJerryBGreg J: Thanks. And that is why I am called the token liberal at MCN's MEN'S DINNER'S.<p>Greg J:</p>
<p>Thanks.</p>
<p>And that is why I am called the token liberal at MCN&#39;s MEN&#39;S DINNER&#39;S.</p>Xuuths commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017d3e06ba64970c2012-11-21T20:13:32Z2012-11-21T20:13:32ZXuuthsBarry3, your ignorance about federal spending is legion. The federal fiscal year is from October 1st of one year through...<p>Barry3, your ignorance about federal spending is legion. The federal fiscal year is from October 1st of one year through September 30th of the next -- meaning that the entire first nine months of calendar year 2009&#39;s budget were legislated under Bush.</p>
<p>Understand now?</p>
<p>I won&#39;t comment about your errors concerning the Obama tax cuts. Wasted breath.</p>Greg J. commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017ee57b9b15970d2012-11-21T20:02:22Z2012-11-21T20:02:22ZGreg J.@JerryB, I have to disagree with you on points that Dienne and Wendy raised although I agree with Dienne's conclusion...<p>@JerryB,</p>
<p>I have to disagree with you on points that Dienne and Wendy raised although I agree with Dienne&#39;s conclusion for opposite reasons. Also, Occam&#39;s Razor asked you a trick question the answer to which I give below.</p>
<p>On foreign aid, you might want to check out this book sometime. <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Aid-Dependence-Cambodia-Assistance-Undermines/dp/0231161123/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1351375805&sr=8-1&keywords=sophal+ear" rel="nofollow">http://www.amazon.com/Aid-Dependence-Cambodia-Assistance-Undermines/dp/0231161123/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1351375805&amp;sr=8-1&amp;keywords=sophal+ear</a></p>
<p>I also pulled up a story from Jay Nordlinger about US intervention in Africa to help with the continent&#39;s AIDS problem. Here is the relevant part - &quot;I met a West African government official. I said to him, “I know that foreign aid has its pluses and minuses. But tell me: Is foreign aid more a help or more a hurt?” He fixed me with a look — kind of a mischievous one — and said, “Do you know the difference between AID and AIDS? The letter S.”&quot; <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/331864/finish-c-jay-nordlinger?pg=2#" rel="nofollow">http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/331864/finish-c-jay-nordlinger?pg=2#</a></p>
<p>On No Child Left Behind, I completely agree with Wendy. I criticize liberals all of the time for proposing well-meaning legislation that has horrible unintended consequences. In fairness, that is the proper criticism of No Child Left Behind too. </p>
<p>The lessons? Our government does plenty to screw up our country and doesn&#39;t need to be in the business of spending taxpayer dollars to screw up other countries no matter how compassionate-sounding its mission happens to be. Our federal government does plenty to make a mess of areas properly governed by federal law and does not need to make a mess of local school districts also.</p>
<p>To answer Occam&#39;s question, there is no such thing as compassionate conservatism because real conservatives understand that the government is incapable of compassion. We exercise compassion only by reducing government.</p>Barry3 commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017d3e069dd5970c2012-11-21T19:53:42Z2012-11-21T19:53:42ZBarry3Ted, Krugman and other lefties think 2009 spending was all Bush, when in fact much of the incremental spending was...<p>Ted,</p>
<p>Krugman and other lefties think 2009 spending was all Bush, when in fact much of the incremental spending was caused by the Stimulus and other Obama initiatives.</p>
<p>Obama has had two tax cuts, both temporary, the Make Work tax Credit of $400/$800 was part of the Stimulus. This expired after 2010. The next tax cut is the 2% FICA tax cut which expires next month. He also did extend the Bush tax cuts.</p>
<p>As for Obama&#39;s recovery and job growth - that&#39;s just liberal cheerleading. Here is what real economic growth coming out of a long and deep recession looks like:</p>
<p><a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203718504577181073385102022.html?mod=googlenews_wsj" rel="nofollow">http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203718504577181073385102022.html?mod=googlenews_wsj</a></p>JerryB commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017d3e0652e8970c2012-11-21T19:01:26Z2012-11-21T19:01:26ZJerryBDienne: YOU say -- [He was responsible for *promising* a lot of funding. He was also responsible for such funding...<p>Dienne:</p>
<p>YOU say -- [He was responsible for *promising* a lot of funding. He was also responsible for such funding never actually materializing.]</p>
<p>I saw this praise for GWB on a recent PBS INDEPENDENT LENS program dealing with the subject of HIV in Black America.</p>Wendy commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017ee57b3455970d2012-11-21T18:48:37Z2012-11-21T18:48:37ZWendy"No child left behind. This legislation may have been misguided – but it did put a spotlight on the fact...<p>&quot;No child left behind. This legislation may have been misguided – but it did put a spotlight on the fact that some children were being left behind. Teachers and principals hated that.&quot;</p>
<p>What we hate is the fact more students are being left behind, if not actually abandoned, thanks to this ridiculous piece of legislation. Where&#39;s the compassion here?</p>Ted commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017ee57b1e08970d2012-11-21T18:31:41Z2012-11-21T18:31:41ZTed--BC - again, any calculations will need to factor in things like specific areas of austerity, how it would work...<p>--BC - again, any calculations will need to factor in things like specific areas of austerity, how it would work if not combined with tax increases, and the long term economic results of increasing debt. </p>
<p>In terms of U.S., I don&#39;t get how Krugman and liberal pundits argue:</p>
<p>A) spending has actually slowed under Obama <br />
B) a significant part of Obama economic policy has been tax cuts<br />
C) Obama&#39;s recovery and job growth are good. </p>Dienne commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017c33d795c8970b2012-11-21T18:22:17Z2012-11-21T18:22:17ZDienne"3) IIRC GWB was responsible for a lot of funding for aid to African victims of HIV." He was responsible...<p>&quot;3) IIRC GWB was responsible for a lot of funding for aid to African victims of HIV.&quot;</p>
<p>He was responsible for *promising* a lot of funding. He was also responsible for such funding never actually materializing.</p>
<p>Your other points are all so warped I can&#39;t even think where to begin. It just reminds me of how, during the Inquisition, torture was considered to be compassionate if it forced the sinner to repent and save his immortal soul.</p>JerryB commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017c33d78d42970b2012-11-21T18:15:19Z2012-11-21T18:15:19ZJerryBOccam: And here is another rhetorical question: Is it shame on you or shame on me that you find my...<p>Occam:</p>
<p>And here is another rhetorical question:</p>
<p>Is it shame on you or shame on me that you find my posts and questions to have &quot;so little content?&quot;</p>
<p>You, Taxpayer, and I are all small potatoes. It is about &quot;substantive content&quot; -- not about us.</p>
<p>Basically I dissent. If it stings and disturbs -- then all the better. Note that j. meehan is correct. I can easily be ignored on CoS.</p>JerryB commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017c33d77eb3970b2012-11-21T18:03:41Z2012-11-21T18:03:41ZJerryBOccam’s Razor: I deserve nothing. The questions were rhetorical. But you ask --- [And Jerry, Jerry, Jerry...so many questions, so...<p>Occam’s Razor:</p>
<p>I deserve nothing. The questions were rhetorical.</p>
<p>But you ask --- [And Jerry, Jerry, Jerry...so many questions, so many posts, so little content. Before you deserve any answers to your questions, please answer my request for a specific legislative example of conservative compassion.]</p>
<p>1) Most pro-life legislation. This is compassion for the unborn.</p>
<p>2) School voucher legislation – compassion for those disadvantaged motivated students stuck in classrooms full of unmotivated students.</p>
<p>3) IIRC GWB was responsible for a lot of funding for aid to African victims of HIV.</p>
<p>4) In Wisconsin – anti-public sector union legislation. This was compassion for the taxpayers to stem abuse by the powerful public sector unions. </p>
<p>5) No child left behind. This legislation may have been misguided – but it did put a spotlight on the fact that some children were being left behind. Teachers and principals hated that.</p>
<p>6) Attempts to secure the Southern Border and to stop illegal aliens from working. This is compassion for poor American workers. Note that some so called “fat cat” capitalists actually benefit from a cheap source of illegal labor.<br />
</p>BC commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017ee57ac2d4970d2012-11-21T17:22:01Z2012-11-21T17:22:01ZBCRE: austerity in Britain "[W]e believe that a reform process based on a pillar of fiscal austerity alone risks becoming...<p>RE: austerity in Britain</p>
<p>&quot;[W]e believe that a reform process based on a pillar of fiscal austerity alone risks becoming self-defeating, as domestic demand falls in line with consumers&#39; rising concerns about job security and disposable incomes, eroding national tax revenues.&quot;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-16560626" rel="nofollow">http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-16560626</a></p>
<p>&quot;The independent Office for Budget Responsibility implicitly used a &quot;fiscal multiplier&quot; of 0.5 to estimate the impact of the coalition&#39;s tax rises and spending cuts on the economy. That meant each pound of cuts was expected to reduce economic output by 50p. However, after examining the records of many countries that have embraced austerity since the financial crisis, the IMF reckons the true multiplier is 0.9-1.7.</p>
<p>Calculations made for the Observer by the TUC reveal that if the real multiplier is 1.3 – the middle of the IMF&#39;s range – the OBR has underestimated the impact of the cuts by a cumulative £76bn, more than 8% of GDP, over five years. Instead of shaving less than 1% off economic growth during this financial year, austerity has depressed it by more than 2%, helping to explain why the economy has plunged into a double-dip recession.&quot;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/oct/13/imf-george-osborne-austerity-76bn" rel="nofollow">http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/oct/13/imf-george-osborne-austerity-76bn</a></p>
<p><br />
Here&#39;s a whole web site dedicated to stories about austerity in Britain: <br />
<a href="http://www.mirror.co.uk/all-about/austerity%20britain" rel="nofollow">http://www.mirror.co.uk/all-about/austerity%20britain</a><br />
</p>Occam's Razor commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017c33d74367970b2012-11-21T17:17:42Z2012-11-21T17:17:42ZOccam's RazorXuuths just made my point in one sentence. Well done. And Jerry, Jerry, Jerry...so many questions, so many posts, so...<p>Xuuths just made my point in one sentence. Well done.</p>
<p>And Jerry, Jerry, Jerry...so many questions, so many posts, so little content. Before you deserve any answers to your questions, please answer my request for a specific legislative example of conservative compassion.</p>Ted commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017d3e05a6e3970c2012-11-21T16:53:58Z2012-11-21T16:53:58ZTed--@Taxpayer - how 'harsh' Britain's austerity has been is questionable, as government spending continues to rise: http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/looking-at-austerity-in-britain/ Regardless, it's only...<p>--@Taxpayer - how &#39;harsh&#39; Britain&#39;s austerity has been is questionable, as government spending continues to rise:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/looking-at-austerity-in-britain/" rel="nofollow">http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/looking-at-austerity-in-britain/</a></p>
<p>Regardless, it&#39;s only one piece of the puzzle. Combining austerity with tax increases has not been a good mix for Europe, at least in the short term:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/charleskadlec/2012/05/07/why-european-austerity-fails/" rel="nofollow">http://www.forbes.com/sites/charleskadlec/2012/05/07/why-european-austerity-fails/</a></p>Xuuths commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017c33d70790970b2012-11-21T16:29:24Z2012-11-21T16:29:24ZXuuthsBrooks is describing democrats, not republicans.<p>Brooks is describing democrats, not republicans.</p>Greg J. commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017d3e052208970c2012-11-21T15:14:32Z2012-11-21T15:14:32ZGreg J.Robert Pruter and Taxpayer lead off the discussion with some very insightful and interesting comments. If you want the sensible...<p>Robert Pruter and Taxpayer lead off the discussion with some very insightful and interesting comments. If you want the sensible liberal point of view on where conservatism is and where it&#39;s headed, I&#39;d start with them. Oh, and speaking of the sensible left, I can not move on without noting my complete agreement with Garry&#39;s comment. </p>
<p>Robert Pruter writes &quot;I can&#39;t imagine an effective Republican Party doing well with a pale imitation of the Democratic Party, ...&quot; Of course he&#39;s right. The first problem is that the bottom would fall out of the current conservative coalition and the second problem is that you can&#39;t win by imitating someone else only offering less and coming off as less genuine.</p>
<p>Taxpayer offers &quot;So here&#39;s my advice to conservatives, who can take it for what it&#39;s worth - come back to utilitarianism.&quot; Well, politicians are supposed to be realists, if not utilitarians, so that problem should take care of itself. Where we got into trouble with Romney is that he was a bit too utilitarian, in the sense that he adapted his policies to whatever he thought would get him the most votes at the time. With utilitarianism, as with anything else, one can go overboard.</p>
<p>What about Brooks&#39; categories of conservatives? I have my quibbles but he&#39;s thought about it a lot more than I have. I like and dislike some of what each of his groups have to offer. I&#39;m a fusionist conservative and I&#39;ll leave it at that (wikipedia Frank Meyer / fusionism if you care to know what that means).</p>
<p>The conservative-political-entertainment complex (great name, I agree) doesn&#39;t interest me a whole lot. I don&#39;t think it has added anything to conservative thought although probably that&#39;s an elitist perspective. I think in some ways it has improved the brand (one can&#39;t ignore its populist appeal) and in other ways has damaged it. I don&#39;t pay attention and this Thanksgiving when my Mom leaves the room with the Fox yappers screaming on the TV or whatever radio host yelling on her little radio, I&#39;ll walk by and shut it off. I&#39;m more impressed by thinkers than shouters, which is why I hang out at National Review&#39;s website and here.</p>
<p>Finally, ...</p>
<p>ZORN REPLY --Whither progressivism? Forward, as the Obama slogan had it. Progressives kicked some butt in the last election and it&#39;s conservatives, so sure they were going to win, so stunned by their losses, so daunted by the demographic trends, who are left openly wondering how to get their mojo back. </p>
<p>GREG J REPLY -- Oh, they certainly did a number on us and there is no doubt in my mind that Obama is every bit a progressive. I&#39;m not as impressed with the demographic explanation as I am with the explanation that we had terrible candidates but that&#39;s for another time. If I was a progressive, I&#39;d be looking forward too because looking backward requires coming to grips with eugenics and population control, and other nasty things that progressives advocated back in the day.</p>Taxpayer commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017ee5794ed4970d2012-11-21T12:44:34Z2012-11-21T12:44:34ZTaxpayerMonahan, The yield on 10 year treasury bonds is 1.5%, which is extremely low by historical standards, and which is...<p>Monahan,</p>
<p>The yield on 10 year treasury bonds is 1.5%, which is extremely low by historical standards, and which is about one point lower than when Obama took office. Your side has been soothsaying doom in the form of bond vigilantes for years but reality stubbornly keeps failing to conform to your ideology. Might be time to update your ideology to conform it to reality.</p>Richard Monahan commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017d3e0210a2970c2012-11-21T06:45:54Z2012-11-21T06:45:54ZRichard Monahan@taxpayer: In case you haven't noticed you join the austerity club when nobody wants to buy your lousy bonds no...<p>@taxpayer: In case you haven&#39;t noticed you join the austerity club when nobody wants to buy your lousy bonds no matter what interest you may want to pay. Britain was barely a notch above the PIGS. Growth? you mean the debt? the deficit? the unemployment rate? it&#39;s higher now than when your man took office. You can make choices now on what must be done or you can have choices made for you just like in the Eurozone. The policies we are following are doomed to failure and at some point we will be forced to pay the price. This President has no intention of making anything near the required cuts in entitlements that are needed but I can guarantee we will get the taxes. </p>Richard Monahan commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017c33d34e54970b2012-11-21T06:15:01Z2012-11-21T06:15:01ZRichard Monahan--@jerryb:I was stunned when Glass-Steagall was repealed. Back to 20% down? You want to go back to the old rule...<p>--@jerryb:I was stunned when Glass-Steagall was repealed. Back to 20% down? You want to go back to the old rule of thumbs? 3 months salary on an engagement ring, 2and half years income for a home etc. they still hold true, the problem is you don&#39;t get much for you money. Requires large down scaling of expectations.</p>JerryB commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017c33d325e1970b2012-11-21T05:50:25Z2012-11-21T05:50:25ZJerryBTaxpayer: OK let me apologize. I really do not expect you to answer a zillion questions. I am not sure...<p>Taxpayer:</p>
<p>OK let me apologize. I really do not expect you to answer a zillion questions.</p>
<p>I am not sure of the answers myself.</p>
<p> The purpose of these many questions was merely to ask whither liberalism? Whither progressivism? </p>
<p>Sorry again that I made you the whipping boy.</p>
<p>I guess I really wanted to show that there are no easy answers and even playing the game of “whither this or that” is idiotic.</p>
<p>ZORN REPLY --Whither progressivism? Forward, as the Obama slogan had it. Progressives kicked some butt in the last election and it&#39;s conservatives, so sure they were going to win, so stunned by their losses, so daunted by the demographic trends, who are left openly wondering how to get their mojo back. <br />
</p>JerryB commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017d3e019b25970c2012-11-21T05:30:21Z2012-11-21T05:30:21ZJerryBTaxpayer: I have repeatedly described myself as a moderate conservative/libertarian. I am for same sex marriage and workplace safety through...<p>Taxpayer:</p>
<p>I have repeatedly described myself as a moderate conservative/libertarian. I am for same sex marriage and workplace safety through regulation. I am to the left of MCN, Greg J. and Boris.</p>
<p>I agree with Kip on issues of workplace safety. I share Dienne&#39;s reluctance to have the U.S. act as the world&#39;s policeman. </p>
<p>I am certain of very little. I do always want to be right. And the best way to be nearly always right is to modify one&#39;s views in light of new information and better thinking.</p>
<p>Recently much of my economic thinking was challenged by the 2007-2008 financial collapse.</p>
<p>I will receive a benefit if you answer my questions. And if you do not answer I will merely opine whither liberalism? Whither progressivism? I am sure others will do the same.</p>j meehan commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017ee57672f6970d2012-11-21T05:20:59Z2012-11-21T05:20:59Zj meehan23 entries on this topic. 12 by the babbling incomparable Jerry B. In a bit over 4 hours. 'Will no...<p>23 entries on this topic.</p>
<p>12 by the babbling incomparable Jerry B.</p>
<p>In a bit over 4 hours.</p>
<p>&#39;Will no one rid me of this troublesome clerk,&#39; to quote a king of England in not dissimilar circumstances. Though I do not suggest the extreme means used in that cathedral.</p>Taxpayer commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017c33d2e99d970b2012-11-21T05:12:06Z2012-11-21T05:12:06ZTaxpayerJerry, Maybe I can clear this up for you. You seem to believe that I answer to you and that...<p>Jerry,</p>
<p>Maybe I can clear this up for you. You seem to believe that I answer to you and that I have some responsibility to answer questions that you are interested in or want answers to. </p>
<p>Your beliefs are incorrect. Please stop behaving as if they were correct. <br />
</p>JerryB commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017c33d2e607970b2012-11-21T05:09:27Z2012-11-21T05:09:27ZJerryBGarry: MCN, Boris, Greg J and I should also start calling ourselves liberals while saying the same stuff we have...<p>Garry:</p>
<p>MCN, Boris, Greg J and I should also start calling ourselves liberals while saying the same stuff we have always said.</p>
<p>After all -- Taxpayer and Occam are not giving us any hints on what they really want. Whither liberalism? Whither progressivism?</p>
<p>BTW: I am for justice, freedom, mom, and apple pie.</p>JerryB commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017ee5765a15970d2012-11-21T05:02:45Z2012-11-21T05:02:45ZJerryBTaxpayer: We want answers to real qustions. You guys just won the Presidential election and can abolish the filibuster. Thus...<p>Taxpayer:</p>
<p>We want answers to real qustions. You guys just won the Presidential election and can abolish the filibuster. </p>
<p>Thus tell us what you want. Do Not play the dainty child by objecting to form. You have a lot of advice for conservatives -- but you seem unable to tell the center and the left where you want to go.</p>JerryB commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017ee576515e970d2012-11-21T04:56:01Z2012-11-21T04:56:01ZJerryBTaxpayer: You say -- [Monahan, If you can't recognize how "do you guys want to move in the direction of...<p>Taxpayer:</p>
<p>You say -- [Monahan, If you can&#39;t recognize how &quot;do you guys want to move in the direction of a cradle-to-grave welfare state&quot; is loaded, then you&#39;re more wrapped up in the bizarro conservative alternate universe than even I would have guessed.]</p>
<p>Well you understand the gist of the question and why we would be curious about this matter.Thus &quot;unload&quot; the question first and then answer it.</p>JerryB commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017c33d2cf55970b2012-11-21T04:51:36Z2012-11-21T04:51:36ZJerryBTaxpayer: You were against the second war inIraq. Fair enough. But how about the first Iraq war? How about the...<p>Taxpayer:</p>
<p>You were against the second war inIraq. Fair enough.</p>
<p> But how about the first Iraq war? How about the Libyan military involvement? How about the non- involvement in Rwanda? Did you support President Obama’s surge in Afganistan? What is the liberal/progressive position on this? What is the utilitarian position?</p>Taxpayer commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017c33d2c88d970b2012-11-21T04:45:53Z2012-11-21T04:45:53ZTaxpayerMonahan, If you can't recognize how "do you guys want to move in the direction of a cradle-to-grave welfare state"...<p>Monahan, If you can&#39;t recognize how &quot;do you guys want to move in the direction of a cradle-to-grave welfare state&quot; is loaded, then you&#39;re more wrapped up in the bizarro conservative alternate universe than even I would have guessed.</p>
<p>Further evidence of the Republican reality-avoidance forcefield is in your citation of the British experience as evidence that Obama is pursuing anti-growth policies. If you haven&#39;t noticed, Britain joined that club when it started pursuing harsh austerity policies. Countries that have had more austerity than Britain, like Greece and Spain and Ireland, are doing even worse than Britain is. Republicans are the enthusiastically pro-austerity party in the US. If you&#39;re a fan of growth, be glad Obama won the election. If your party would embrace inconvenient facts like this, instead of deflecting them, you would be a heck of a lot more credible.</p>Garry commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017c33d2c3da970b2012-11-21T04:42:28Z2012-11-21T04:42:28ZGarryAs a liberal that's fed up with illegal immigration, I will agree to some immigration reform as long as it's...<p>As a liberal that&#39;s fed up with illegal immigration, I will agree to some immigration reform as long as it&#39;s done by constitutional amendment to forever make all illegal immigrants &amp; their descendants illegal, ineligible for all government benefits &amp; one other very important thing.</p>
<p>That amendment must also make English the sole legal language of all government in this country!<br />
There would be only two possible legal ways for another language to be used:<br />
At international ports of entry &amp; translation services in courts.<br />
Nothing else!<br />
All voting in English, all driver&#39;s test in English, no signs on the buses in any other language but English, all instruction in schools in English except for classes to teach student a foreign language &amp; no more &quot;Press 1 for English&quot;!</p>
<p>Other than Switzerland [even they have occasional problems with this] no country has successfully survived with more than one language. Belgium is on the verge of breaking up, Canada has a huge problem with French speaking Quebec, Russia &amp; the former Soviet Union was an ethnic &amp; linguistic mess.</p>
<p>English has become the de facto language of science for the entire world. Every other country that wants to advance requires its student to learn English so they can learn.<br />
English is the de jure language of international airlines except for Russia.<br />
Yet our idiot legislators make our election ballots difficult to impossible to read because they demand multiple languages on them.</p>JerryB commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017ee5763b15970d2012-11-21T04:38:16Z2012-11-21T04:38:16ZJerryBTaxpayer & Occam: Are you in favor of going back to the traditional American way of finanacing home ownership --...<p>Taxpayer &amp; Occam:</p>
<p>Are you in favor of going back to the traditional American way of finanacing home ownership -- 20% down and the loan stays with the originating bank.</p>
<p>Am I being liberal/progressive or a conservative in saying this? Am I being ideological or pragramatic? Is this the greatest good for the greatest number -- i.e utilitarian?</p>JerryB commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017d3e014a79970c2012-11-21T04:33:12Z2012-11-21T04:33:12ZJerryBTaxpayer & Monahan: As a technical matter Wall Street can never be adequately regulated. This will only give us a...<p>Taxpayer &amp; Monahan:</p>
<p>As a technical matter Wall Street can never be adequately regulated. This will only give us a false sense of security. They will always be one step ahead of the regulators. This has an actual name called “loophole mining.” There is also the matter of “regulatory capture” of the regulators by the regulated. An imposition of Glass-Steagall would be better. Am I being a conservative in saying this? Am I being ideological?<br />
</p>JerryB commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017ee5762699970d2012-11-21T04:23:18Z2012-11-21T04:23:18ZJerryBTaxpayer: I thought we should have gotten out of Afghanistan years ago. I was against the Libyan military adventure. President...<p>Taxpayer:</p>
<p>I thought we should have gotten out of Afghanistan years ago. I was against the Libyan military adventure. President Obama thought otherwise. Who was being the liberal/progressive? Who was being the conservative? </p>
<p>Who was being driven by pragmatism? Who was being driven by ideology?<br />
</p>Richard Monahan commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017ee5762559970d2012-11-21T04:22:35Z2012-11-21T04:22:35ZRichard Monahan@Robert Pruter; I* have no desire to be in anyone's bedroom. And don't ask me to pay to prevent or...<p>@Robert Pruter; I* have no desire to be in anyone&#39;s bedroom. And don&#39;t ask me to pay to prevent or correct any unwanted results from what happened there. </p>
<p>@Taxpayer: How are those loaded questions? </p>
<p>And now we can look forward to the liberal/progressive solutions: Higher taxes, bigger government, more regulation . </p>
<p>Or as a British commentator succinctly put it: We are all now members of the Permanent No-growth Club. And the United States has just re-elected a president who seems determined to sign up too. No government in what used to be called “the free world” seems prepared to take the steps that can stop this inexorable decline. They are all busily telling their electorates that austerity is for other people (France), or that the piddling attempts they have made at it will solve the problem (Britain), or that taxing “the rich” will make it unnecessary for government to cut back its own spending (America). </p>JerryB commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017c33d29ad9970b2012-11-21T04:12:53Z2012-11-21T04:12:53ZJerryBPruter: Thanks for responding to the “devil is in the details” problem. But for very strong PRAGMATIC reasons I am...<p>Pruter:</p>
<p>Thanks for responding to the “devil is in the details” problem. </p>
<p>But for very strong PRAGMATIC reasons I am a very strong “equal protection of the law” proponent. In concrete terms this means “yes” for same sex marriage and “no” for almost all affirmative action. </p>
<p>But in your eyes am I being pragmatic in my opposition to AA or ideological?<br />
</p>JerryB commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017ee5760817970d2012-11-21T04:01:33Z2012-11-21T04:01:33ZJerryBOn another thread the left of center Dr. X completed demolished the idea that there can be a single moderate/centrist...<p>On another thread the left of center Dr. X completed demolished the idea that there can be a single moderate/centrist party since there are many different types of moderate policies. (I hope I paraphrased Dr. X correctly. My apologies if I did not.) And Greg J. completely agreed. Again the devil is in the details.</p>Robert Pruter commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017d3e010e10970c2012-11-21T03:53:41Z2012-11-21T03:53:41ZRobert PruterYes indeed, the devil is in the details, and that is what gives rise to political differences. But my point...<p>Yes indeed, the devil is in the details, and that is what gives rise to political differences. But my point is that I think issues should be viewed in a pragmatic sense rather than ideological sense. When people think ideologically they tend to think in terms of only one course of action, the course of action that always fits their ideology..</p>
<p>I tend to be a fox rather than a hedgehog (from Isaiah Berlin&#39;s famous essay), and I think most of the people in the mushy middle tend to be foxes as well. Tea Party adherents and Jesse Jackson type democrats tend to be hedgehogs.</p>Barry3 commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017c33d27f4b970b2012-11-21T03:53:39Z2012-11-21T03:53:39ZBarry3Pruter, "but I can't imagine an effective Republican Party doing well with a pale imitation of the Democratic Party (that...<p>Pruter,</p>
<p>&quot;but I can&#39;t imagine an effective Republican Party doing well with a pale imitation of the Democratic Party (that really does care about protecting the environment, keeping church and state separate and ameliorating the ravages of poverty and really doesn&#39;t care what consenting adults do in the bedroom).&quot; Nice straw man. </p>
<p>GOP does care about the environment, but does not believe that the problems (global warming) are as dire as the democrats and don&#39;t believe in killing our economy unilaterally is the solution. The GOP also does believe in the seperation of church and state and it also believes that freedom of religion is different than freedom from religion. We don&#39;t care what you do in your bedroom. gay marriage is not a bedroom issue and abortions are not performed in the bedroom either.</p>
<p>&quot;but I can&#39;t imagine an effective Democrat Party that really does care about proteca grwoing economy, dismantling religious institutions, creating more poverty thru redistribution and wants to regulate what individuals eat and drink and the portions of their servings.&quot; How&#39;s that for a straw man?</p>
<p>It is the nomination of the GOP that will happen once the Cult of Personality leaves the building in 2016. In 2014, the democrats will have to defend Senate seats like Frankens in an off-year election where democratioc turnout is weak. Also, in 2016, do you think Hillary or Biden will turn out the youth and minority vote like Obama did? After four more years of Obamanomics which will have a recession in the next four years, Americans will have had enough.</p>Pan commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017ee575f341970d2012-11-21T03:48:31Z2012-11-21T03:48:31ZPanEric, I love ya, but you are NOT making me read a David Brooks column or take him seriously.<p>Eric, I love ya, but you are NOT making me read a David Brooks column or take him seriously.</p>JerryB commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017ee575f302970d2012-11-21T03:48:21Z2012-11-21T03:48:21ZJerryBTaxpayer: You say -- [I'm not answering your silly loaded questions, Jerry, pretend handshake or no. They're full of false...<p>Taxpayer:</p>
<p>You say --</p>
<p>[I&#39;m not answering your silly loaded questions, Jerry, pretend handshake or no. They&#39;re full of false dichotomies, misleading framing, and overgeneralization. Nor am I interested in being examined by you.]</p>
<p>But those are the issues that I am interested in.</p>
<p>So feel free to answer similar questions more to your liking. In other words &quot;unload&quot; the questions, create &quot;true&quot; dichotomies; and make the questions that you want to answer more specific. </p>JerryB commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017ee575e8f6970d2012-11-21T03:41:17Z2012-11-21T03:41:17ZJerryBPruter: You say -- [Taxpayer has a good point. I would use the term pragmatic rather than utilitarian for some...<p><br />
Pruter:</p>
<p>You say --</p>
<p>[Taxpayer has a good point. I would use the term pragmatic rather than utilitarian for some of what he is explaining. I tend to think in pragmatic terms, in other words what policies, no matter the ideological origin, works best for the country and for the American people.] </p>
<p>Well I will do you one better -- I want what works super-duper best. My point again is that the devil is in the details.</p>
<p>My very good friend MCN honestly believes that what would work best for the country is sex only between a man and a woman married to one another.</p>
<p>But if you really think about it a very good argument can be made for sex only within marriage whether it be hetero or same sex marriage.</p>
<p>I do not want to argue sex wrt marriage but again to only emphasize that the devil is in the details.</p>
<p></p>
<p><br />
</p>Taxpayer commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017d3e00f208970c2012-11-21T03:34:22Z2012-11-21T03:34:22ZTaxpayerI'm not answering your silly loaded questions, Jerry, pretend handshake or no. They're full of false dichotomies, misleading framing, and...<p>I&#39;m not answering your silly loaded questions, Jerry, pretend handshake or no. They&#39;re full of false dichotomies, misleading framing, and overgeneralization. Nor am I interested in being examined by you. </p>JerryB commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017ee575d99b970d2012-11-21T03:30:01Z2012-11-21T03:30:01ZJerryBTaxpayer and Occam: Also be very specific about immigration reform.<p>Taxpayer and Occam:</p>
<p>Also be very specific about immigration reform.</p>JerryB commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017c33d2561e970b2012-11-21T03:25:23Z2012-11-21T03:25:23ZJerryBTaxpayer and Occam: Picture me at this point reaching out to shake your hands before we start talking. I really...<p>Taxpayer and Occam:</p>
<p>Picture me at this point reaching out to shake your hands before we start talking. I really do not want to argue my beliefs but to examine what you guys really want. I will also say that the Brooks article was pedantic. I would rather look at good or bad policies instead of philosophies stated in abstract terms. </p>
<p>1) Do you guys want to move in the direction of a cradle to grave welfare state?</p>
<p>2) Do you guys want the US to be the world’s policeman or should we be moving to an isolationist foreign policy?</p>
<p>3) Should the incoming Senate abolish the filibuster?</p>
<p>4) Is utilitarianism really a meaningless term? Generally it means let’s do good for the greatest number. But can it really be more specific?</p>
<p>5) Should the government pursue a lot more affirmative action for minorities, women, gays, etc.</p>
<p>6) Should the government be picking winners and losers?</p>
<p>I ask all this because as they say “the devil is in the details.”</p>
<p>And if you want conservatism to change then by answering the above questions you will be teling us in which direction is the preferred change.</p>Robert Pruter commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017d3e008d2c970c2012-11-21T02:23:04Z2012-11-21T02:23:04ZRobert PruterTaxpayer has a good point. I would use the term pragmatic rather than utilitarian for some of what he is...<p>Taxpayer has a good point. I would use the term pragmatic rather than utilitarian for some of what he is explaining. I tend to think in pragmatic terms, in other words what policies, no matter the ideological origin, works best for the country and for the American people. </p>Taxpayer commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017c33d1f21d970b2012-11-21T02:15:03Z2012-11-21T02:15:03ZTaxpayerI found this less annoying than most Brooks columns, probably because he's using his usual rhetorical tricks in service of...<p>I found this less annoying than most Brooks columns, probably because he&#39;s using his usual rhetorical tricks in service of a cause I believe in. But I do think that picking a pop-philosophical basis for &quot;conservatism&quot; is putting the cart way way before the horse. I mean, I like Larison as much as the next anti-war liberal, but he&#39;s no Rawls or even Nozick. And citing McCardle and Dreher as intellectual role models, well, that&#39;s pretty foolish.</p>
<p>Here&#39;s my 2 cents - the Republican Party and the conservative movement have gone wrong in a major way by elevating philosophical niceties over pragmatism. I think most Americans are bounded utilitarians - they think government should do things that make people better off and not do things that make people worse off. There are boundaries to this, of course - lots of people think that the government shouldn&#39;t punish obnoxious speech, even if punishing that speech would make all-of-us better off. But those counter-utilitarian carve outs are the exception, not the rule. </p>
<p>Movement conservatism has turned this on its head - most of the policies it endorses can not be justified on utilitarian grounds. We can&#39;t have gay marriage, even though it benefits some and hurts no one, because it&#39;s against the Bible. We have to invade Iraq, even if it results in the deaths of thousands of Americans and tens or hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, because Saddam is bad and needs to be punished. We can&#39;t raise taxes on the wealthiest, who would hardly even notice the difference, because it&#39;s wrong to do so for some crackpot reason. </p>
<p>But I think most conservatives are smart enough to recognize that most Americans are basically utilitarians, which leads to the transparent lies that Republicans have to tell to justify their preferred policies. Gay marriage will undermine opposite-sex marriage! Iraq will soon have an atomic bomb (or, later, we found WMDs or they were moved to Syria). </p>
<p>So here&#39;s my advice to conservatives, who can take it for what it&#39;s worth - come back to utilitarianism. You don&#39;t have to be pure utilitarians, but you have to stop letting the exceptions swallow the rule. You&#39;ll be able to adopt more popular policies, stop telling so many lies, and I think you&#39;ll do better at the ballot box. </p>Occam's Razor commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017ee5755c43970d2012-11-21T01:56:45Z2012-11-21T01:56:45ZOccam's RazorI usually enjoy Brooks, but this column is just a load of gobbledygook. Lower-Middle Reformists? Burkean Revivalists? Come on. Eric’s...<p>I usually enjoy Brooks, but this column is just a load of gobbledygook. Lower-Middle Reformists? Burkean Revivalists? Come on.</p>
<p>Eric’s phrase, “Conservatism that is bold, nimble, compassionate, open-minded…..” makes me laugh out loud.</p>
<p>Bold: Bold means being brave and trying new ideas or new ways of doing things, bucking tradition and going out on your own. Conservatives try to keep things the way they are, or to revert to the way things used to be. Conservatism equals old, not bold.</p>
<p>Nimble: This means changing course rapidly in response to new stimuli or conditions, being flexible or open to change. This is the antithesis of conservatism, which if it had a word to describe it, that word might be stasis.</p>
<p>Compassionate: Conservative compassion appears to be cutting off the funds and forcing people to go out and fend for themselves, which may be appropriate for a portion of the population. It may not be for others. Perhaps our conservative posters can give me a specific legislative example of conservative compassion.</p>
<p>Open-minded: An open-minded person is willing to let reality and other peoples’ opinions and experiences change the way they think about a subject. Conservatives seem to have the same fix for everything that ails society: lower taxes, less regulation, more God. Being progressive and open-minded seem to have a lot in common. Conservatives seem to have made up their minds as to what’s right and aren’t open to discussion.</p>
<p>I now await the usual suspects telling me my conclusions are wrong, my thinking is muddy, my prose is pedantic, and my socks don&#39;t match. I&#39;ll chalk it up to the Three Floyds Alpha King.</p>Robert Pruter commented on 'Whither conservatism?'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451b4ba69e2017c33d18270970b2012-11-21T00:59:15Z2012-11-21T00:59:15ZRobert PruterI can see where the Republican Party might want to get away from some of its more extreme rhetoric and...<p>I can see where the Republican Party might want to get away from some of its more extreme rhetoric and views, which drives away the voters in the center, but I can&#39;t imagine an effective Republican Party doing well with a pale imitation of the Democratic Party (that really does care about protecting the environment, keeping church and state separate and ameliorating the ravages of poverty and really doesn&#39;t care what consenting adults do in the bedroom).</p>
<p>Actually, despite its extremism (some would say &quot;because of its extremism&quot;), the Republican Party is still doing well. Sure they lost the Presidential election and fell behind a couple of Senate Seats (which they will undoubtedly get back as long as they keep the nutcases away). But they retained the House and made continued gains in State houses and governorships, and nobody anticipates any erosion in these areas. </p>
<p>As a Democrat, I see this continued Repubican domination in the House and States for what appears will be for a considerable time is not good for the country.</p>